Karnataka

Kolar

CC/11/200

Sri.C.S.Narayaswamy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager - Opp.Party(s)

D.V. Vishwanatha

03 Apr 2012

ORDER

The District Consumer Redressal Forum
District Office Premises, Kolar 563 101.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/200
 
1. Sri.C.S.Narayaswamy
S/o. Late Siddappa,Aged About 55 Years,Priprietor: Ravi Electricals & Engineering Services,M.G. Road,Chikkabapura City & District. Pin Code:562101.
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

  Date of Filing : 01.10.2011

  Date of Order : 03.04.2012

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR

 

Dated 3rd APRIL 2012

 

PRESENT

 

Sri. H.V. RAMACHANDRA RAO, B.Sc., BL,   …….                PRESIDENT

 

Sri. T.NAGARAJA, B.Sc., LLB.                        ……..     MEMBER

 

Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, B.A., LLB.                    ……..     MEMBER

 

CC No. 200 / 2011

 

Shri. C.S. Narayanaswamy,

S/o. Late Siddappa,

Aged about 55 years,

Proprietor: Ravi Electricals &

Engineering Services, M.G. Road,

Chikkaballapur – 562 101.

 

(By Sri. D.V. Vishwanatha Gowda, Adv.)               ……. Complainant

 

V/s.

 

1. The Branch Manager,

    Life Insurance Corporation of India,

    Post Box No. 5, B.B. Road,

    Chikkaballapur – 562 101.

 

2. The Senior Divisional Manager (AA),

    Life Insurance Corporation of India,

    Divisional Office No. 2,

    Jeevan Jyothi Buildings,

    Next to BDA Complex,

    I Stage, Indiranagar,

    Bangalore – 560 038.

 

    (By Sri. Sama Rangappa, Adv.)                          …… Opposite Parties

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

By Sri. H.V. RAMACHANDRA RAO, PRESIDENT

 

The brief antecedents that lead to the filing of the Complainant made u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act seeking direction to the OP to pay to the Complainant proper amount are necessary:

 

Complainant had obtained Policy from the OP in No. 360071896 which was issued to him on 15.03.1994 and he had paid premium for 3 years & 9 months i.e., upto 37 quarters  by paying Rs.1,477/- per month accumulated to Rs.54,649/-.  On the said Policy, for his needs, he had obtained loan of Rs.47,218/- on 30.10.2002.  Complainant sought revival of the Policy on 18.10.2004.  On 02.09.2004, OP1 intimated the Complainant that Rs.9,748/- is payable after deducting the loan with interest stating that they have calculated surrender value of the Policy. [dates 18.10.2004 & 02.09.2004 may be wrong, because the reply of OP is prior to the letter of Complainant]. OP sent a Cheque for Rs.9,748/- on 23.01.2009 which is very meager.  Hence the Complaint.  

 

2.       In brief version of OP are:

 

 

The Complainant has obtained Policy in question under Plan & Term 14-15 and the sum assured was Rs.80,000/- and the premium was Rs.1,477/- quarterly and the Complainant was irregular in paying quarterly premium, even premium of June 2003 was unpaid.  He has availed policy loan on 30.10.2002 and he has to pay broken period interest upto 15.03.2003 of Rs.1,862/- on 15.03.2003 and thereafter loan interest of Rs.2,482/- payable half yearly on 15th of March & 15th September every year.  Premium of Sep. 2003 was not received by the OP.  Policy gets lapsed as per Para-2 of the payment of premium conditions and privilege under the policy.  OP has initiated to take foreclosure action and sent loan interest default notice to the Complainant on 12.06.2004.  OP received letter of the Complainant on 18.10.2004 and it was referred to the Divisional Office.  Competent Authority gave opportunity for reinstatement of the policy subject to ensure the compliance of all the manual provisions.  It was communicated to the Complainant on 24.01.2005 asking him to pay the premium and interest along with basic DGH declaration of good health and medical report, it has not been submitted.  Accordingly, OP calculated the surrender value of the policy, loan and accrued interest and paid an amount of Rs.9,748/-.

 

3.       To substantiate their respective cases, parties had filed their respective affidavits and documents.  Arguments were heard.

 

 

4.       The points that arise for our consideration are:

 

          (A)     Whether there is deficiency in service ?

 

          (B)     What order ?

 

5.       Our findings are:

 

          (A)     Negative

 

          (B)     As per detailed order for the following reasons

 

REASONS

 

6.       Pleadings of the parties are summarized supra.  Complaint is as bald as it could be so also the prayer is as bald as it could be.  Reading the pleadings in conjunction with the documents on record, it is an admitted fact that the Complainant had obtained Policy from the OP on 15.03.1994 and he had to pay quarterly premium of Rs.1,477/-.  He paid in all 37 quarterly premiums amounting to Rs.54,649/-. He had not paid any premium right from 15.06.2003.

 

7.       Further it is also an admitted fact that the Complainant had obtained loan of Rs.47,280/- on the said policy on 30.10.2002.  For that, he had to pay broken period interest of Rs.1,862/- from 15.03.2003 and half yearly interest of Rs.2,482/- on 15th March & 15th Sep. every year. Complainant was sent loan interest default notice on 12.06.2004 and 01.09.2004 also.  Complainant had not paid anything from 15.06.2003.  Hence his policy was lapsed.

 

8.       Later, on the request of the Complainant, for revival of the Policy Quotation was sent mentioning the amount to be paid and the required form DGH and medical report to be submitted. For that Complainant has not replied nor paid any amount either for revival or for regularizing the loan account.  Hence, OP has foreclosed the Policy & loan and hence OP has refunded Rs.9,748/- by Cheque dtd. 23.01.2009.  This amount has been received by the Complainant.  Complainant was also given option in the letter dtd. 27.06.2009 to prefer an appeal against the foreclosure if he is interested.  Complainant has not approached the Appellate Authorities in the matter and after lapse of 2 years therefrom Complainant has come up before this Forum.  Thus, neither there is deficiency in service nor unfair trade practice.  Even the Complaint is barred by time.  Complainant should have approached this Forum if he is entitled to within 27.06.2009.  But he has filed the Complaint on 01.10.2011.  This is hopelessly barred by time.  Hence, under these circumstances, we hold the point accordingly and pass the following order:

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

1.       Complaint is dismissed.

 

 

2.       Send copy of the Order to the parties concerned free of cost.

 

 

3.       Return extra sets to the parties concerned under Regulation 20(3) of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this the 3rd day of April 2012).

 

 

 

T. NAGARAJA          K.G.SHANTALA           H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO

    Member                         Member                                       President

 

 

SSS

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.